Judge Denies Hunter Biden’s “Frivolous” Bid To Halt Delaware Gun Case

Judge Denies Hunter Biden’s “Frivolous” Bid To Halt Delaware Gun Case

By Caden Pearson | The Epoch Times

A federal judge on Wednesday denied Hunter Biden’s bid to halt the prosecution of his Delaware gun case, deeming it unconvincing and “frivolous.”

U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika issued the ruling on Wednesday, rejecting Mr. Biden’s request to enjoin the investigation led by Special Counsel David Weiss.

Mr. Biden contended that Mr. Weiss’s appointment violated the Appropriations Clause, arguing that he is not an “independent counsel” and was not approved by Congress.

“The Court should enjoin the Special Counsel from continuing to fund his investigation and prosecution of Mr. Biden without an appropriation from Congress or promptly deny the motion so it can be appealed,” Mr. Biden’s motion, filed on May 14, stated.

The judge found no merit in Mr. Biden’s claims, stating that the use of permanent appropriations to fund special counsels has been well-established and previously upheld.

“Mr. Weiss was lawfully appointed,” under relevant statutes, “to serve as special counsel to conduct investigations and prosecutions relating to this criminal matter,” Judge Noreika wrote in her decision, “and he is an ‘independent counsel’ appointed pursuant to ‘other law’ within the mining of the permanent appropriation.”

‘Not as a Serious Request’: Judge

Judge Noreika ruled that Mr. Biden’s motion was not presented as a “serious request” but rather as a necessary procedural step before he could appeal.

Mr. Biden contended that Mr. Weiss lacked authority from Congress because he “is not an independent counsel and that is by design.”

In their response motion, the prosecution highlighted that Mr. Biden’s attempts to claim Appropriations Clause violations had been struck down in two district and two circuit courts, using the same arguments. Additionally, they contended that Mr. Biden “now offers no new facts or law” to support his motion for an injunction.

Mr. Biden acknowledged that his motion relied on previously rejected arguments. He asked the judge to either enjoin Mr. Weiss “or promptly deny the motion so it can be appealed.”

His motion filed on May 14 stated that if the district court found against him regarding his argument of Appropriations Clause violations, “as it did previously,” then he would “have the basis” to take it to the Third Circuit “to address this issue when considering Mr. Biden’s forthcoming petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc.”

In calling his request unserious, the judge highlighted the motion’s length, at four and a half pages, and noted that half of it was dedicated to “explaining why the Third Circuit would have jurisdiction over an appeal should this Court deny the requested injunction.”

“The Court has no reason to believe that Defendant’s inevitable appeal of this denial of his motion for an injunction is any more meritorious than his prior efforts,” Judge Noreika wrote.

Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Mr. Weiss as special counsel on Aug. 11, 2023, to oversee this case and Mr. Biden’s separate tax case in a California court.

Prior Rejected Arguments

Despite Mr. Biden’s series of legal maneuvers, which largely challenged procedural aspects of the prosecution rather than substantive charges, the courts have consistently upheld the legitimacy of the special counsel’s appointment and funding.

Mr. Biden is facing three federal firearm offenses stemming from his 2018 purchase and brief possession of a handgun while struggling with drug addiction.

Mr. Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, was initially charged on June 20, 2023. A grand jury indicted him in September 2023. He first sought to dismiss the charges in December 2023. This was denied on April 12, after which he unsuccessfully appealed various rulings.

Judge Noreika’s ruling on Wednesday came a day after the Third Circuit Court of Appeal rejected Mr. Biden’s appeal to have the indictment dismissed. That decision by a panel of three judges found that the district court’s order denying his motion to dismiss was not appealable, stating that “criminal defendants ordinarily cannot appeal until after final judgment.”

Earlier in the case, on May 14, the district court rejected his request to delay the trial, and on May 21, the Third Circuit denied his motion to stay the district court proceedings. These setbacks came after the Third Circuit dismissed Mr. Biden’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction on May 9.

The case is set to go to trial next week on June 3.

*********

(TLB) published this article by Caden Pearson as posted at The Epoch Times

Header featured image (edited) credit: Judge Noreida/NBC News screen grab illustration

Emphasis added by (TLB)

••••

••••

Stay tuned tuned…

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*